Number 62 n February 14, 2013

Contraceptive Methods Women Have Ever Used:

United States, 1982–2010

by Kimberly Daniels, Ph.D.; William D. Mosher, Ph.D.; and Jo Jones, Ph.D., Division of Vital Statistics

Abstract

Objective—This report presents national estimates of the proportion of

sexually experienced women aged 15–44 who have ever used various methods of

contraception in the United States. Trends are shown since 1982, and results are

shown by Hispanic origin and race, education, and religious affiliation. The

number of methods ever used is also shown, along with reasons for stopping use

of selected methods.

Methods—Data for 2006–2010 were collected through in-person interviews

with 22,682 women and men aged 15–44 in the household population of the

United States. Interviews were conducted by female interviewers in the homes of

sampled persons. This report is based primarily on the sample of 12,279 women

interviewed in 2006–2010 from the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG).

Data from earlier NSFGs are presented to show trends in method choice since

1982.

Results—Virtually all women of reproductive age in 2006–2010 who had

ever had sexual intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method at some

point in their lifetime (99%, or 53 million women aged 15–44), including 88%

who have used a highly effective, reversible method such as birth control pills,

an injectable method, a contraceptive patch, or an intrauterine device. In

2006–2010, the most common methods that women or their partners had ever

used were: the male condom (93%), the pill (82%), withdrawal (60%), and the

injectable, Depo-Provera (23%). Method use varied by race and Hispanic origin,

nativity among Hispanics, education, and religious affiliation, with significant

proportions of women in all categories having used one or more of the most

effective methods. The median number of methods ever used by women was

about three, but nearly 30% have used five or more methods. Side effects were

the most common reason for discontinuing use of the pill, Depo-Provera, and the

patch among women who had ever discontinued using these methods due to

dissatisfaction.

Keywords: contraceptive use and discontinuation • pill • condom • National

Survey of Family Growth

Introduction

The Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention’s National Center for

Health Statistics (NCHS) has conducted

the National Survey of Family Growth

(NSFG) seven times since 1973. The

survey is designed to complement

NCHS vital statistics data on registered

births in the United States by collecting

data on the factors that affect birth and

pregnancy rates—including sexual

activity, marriage, divorce, cohabitation,

contraceptive use, and infertility (1–9).

Information on contraceptive use has

been collected in each NSFG so that

trends can be monitored. This report

includes data since 1982, when the

survey first included all women aged

15–44 regardless of marital status.

This report complements a previous

report by Jones et al. that focused on the

method(s), if any, that women were

using at the date of interview, referred

to as their current contraceptive use (9).

That report presented detailed data on

trends and differences in current use of

contraception by various characteristics,

whereas this report on ever-use adds to

knowledge of contraceptive behavior

over women’s lives in a number of

ways. First, the methods women use

vary over their reproductive life course;

this report provides more information on

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 
Page 2	 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013

women’s history of contraceptive use

and the number of methods women have

ever used even if they are currently not

using contraception, for example, if they

are seeking to become pregnant, are

pregnant, or are postpartum at the time

of the interview. Additionally, this report

includes all sexually experienced women

of reproductive age, whereas Jones et al.

describes contraceptive use for all

women of reproductive age with

detailed analysis on the 62% of women

who were using a contraceptive method

at the time of interview (9).

Second, this report presents data on

selected contraceptive methods that

women tried and subsequently

discontinued using because they were

not satisfied with the method in some

way. In 2006–2008, nearly one-third of

women who had ever used the pill

discontinued use due to dissatisfaction

(1). This report provides information on

the reasons women have for

discontinuing use of those methods.

Third, although the measure of

ever-use does not describe the length of

exposure, it provides a basic indicator of

the population exposed to the benefits

and risks of each method (10). The

report by Jones et al. on current

contraceptive use documents that about

17% of women aged 15–44 were using

the pill at the date of interview, whereas

this report shows that four-fifths of

sexually experienced women have ever

used the pill and have been exposed to

its health benefits and risks over their

reproductive life course.

Lastly, trends and differentials in

ever-use of the condom since 1982 are

noted to show steps women and their

partners have taken not only to prevent

pregnancy, but to prevent the

transmission of sexually transmitted

infections, including HIV. Given that the

first diagnosed case of HIV was

approximately 30 years ago, it is

important to track use of the condom,

the most-used barrier method over this

time period.

Background

The modern birth control movement

originated in 1912 out of concern about

the health effects of high fertility on

women and their children (11). But the

fertility-control methods available

around this time were limited and

primarily coital dependent (e.g., the

condom and withdrawal). It was not

until 1960 that more modern methods of

contraception, including the birth control

pill and the intrauterine device (IUD),

both highly effective and not coital

dependent, became available (10). These

were followed by other highly effective

methods later in the 20th century (11).

Between 1960 and 2006–2010, women

had more options for birth control,

provided that they could obtain these

methods (12). Over this period, women

wanting to use a hormonal method

could choose among many types of birth

control pills, as well as from implants

(Implanon was approved in 2006;

Norplant was approved in 1990 but

withdrawn in 2002), injectables (Lunelle

was introduced in 2000 and withdrawn

in 2002; Depo-Provera was introduced

in 1992), contraceptive patches (Ortho

Evra was approved in 2002),

contraceptive rings (Nuva Ring was

approved in 2001), and IUDs (a copper

IUD Paragard T 380A was approved in

1984; and a low-dose, progestin-only

hormonal IUD Mirena was approved in

2000) (10,13). Like the pill, these newer

methods are not coital dependent and

are highly effective in preventing

pregnancy (14,15), but unlike the pill,

they do not require daily action (10).

Using data from the 2002 NSFG,

Kost et al. estimated that among

sexually active women, the probability

of a woman having an unintended

pregnancy during 1 year of no

contraceptive use was 85% (14). They

found that any contraceptive use

lowered that probability to about 12%

for 1 year of use (14). However, the risk

of an unintended pregnancy varied by

contraceptive method. The probability of

having an unintended pregnancy while

using the following methods for 1 year

with typical use (also called ‘‘failure

rates’’) was:

+	 Less than 1% per year for implants

and IUDs

+	 7% for injectable methods (DepoProvera)

+ 9% for the pill

+ 17% for the condom

+	 Over 20% for periodic abstinence,

withdrawal, and spermicides (14)

Methods

Source of the data

This report uses data primarily from

the 12,279 female respondents of the

2006–2010 NSFG. Data were collected

through in-person interviews from a

representative sample of men and

women aged 15–44 in the household

population of the United States from

June 2006 through June 2010. Detailed

information about the 2006–2010 NSFG

is available (4,7,8). NSFG is jointly

planned and funded by NCHS and

several other programs of the U.S.

Department of Health and Human

Services (see ‘‘Acknowledgments’’). The

interview administered to women

collected information on their births and

pregnancies, marriages and

cohabitations, contraceptive use, use of

medical care related to birth control,

infertility, prenatal care, and social and

demographic characteristics (7,8).

The interview was voluntary;

participants were provided information

about the survey before being asked for

signed informed consent. The survey

was reviewed and approved by the

NCHS and University of Michigan

Institutional Review Boards. The overall

response rate in 2006–2010 was 77%

and the response rate for women was

78% (4). To protect the respondent’s

privacy, only one person in each

selected household was interviewed.

In addition to the data from the

2006–2010 NSFG, some results from

earlier NSFGs are shown to provide

data on trends over the last three

decades. The design, content, and basic

procedures of these surveys, especially

with respect to data on contraceptive use

collected from women, were similar to

the 2006–2010 NSFG (16–18).

Questions on contraceptive

use

Measuring contraceptive use during

heterosexual intercourse is one of the

central goals of NSFG because it is a
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013 Page 3

key factor affecting birth and pregnancy

rates and family formation (1–4). This

report only includes contraceptive use

among women who have ever had

heterosexual intercourse, in part because

the questions on contraceptive use for

men are less detailed than the questions

for women; the questions for men do

not include detail on ever-use of all

methods. The NSFG questionnaire for

women asks a series of questions on

whether she or a partner has ever used

each of more than 20 methods of

contraception at any time in her life up

to the time she is interviewed. More

detail on these measures is available in

the definitions of terms at the end of

this report.

Statistical analysis

Statistics for this report were

produced using SAS software, Version

9.2 (available from http://www.sas.com).

The sampling errors were produced with

SUDAAN software, which is designed

to handle the complex sample designs of

surveys like NSFG (available from

http://www.rti.org/sudaan). All estimates

for 2006–2010 in this report were

weighted to reflect the reproductiveaged female household population of the

United States at the midpoint of

interviewing, June 2008. Women aged

15–44 living on military bases or in

institutions were not included in the

survey. For a more detailed discussion

of sampling errors in the 2006–2010

NSFG, see Lepkowski et al. (8).

Percentages were compared using

two-tailed t tests at the 5% level. No

adjustments were made for multiple

comparisons. Terms such as ‘‘greater

than’’ and ‘‘less than’’ indicate that a

statistically significant difference was

found. Terms such as ‘‘similar’’ or ‘‘no

difference’’ indicate that the statistics

being compared were not significantly

different. Lack of comment regarding

the difference between any two statistics

does not mean that the difference was

tested and found not to be significant.

In the description of the results

below, when the percentage being cited

is below 10% or above 90%, the text

will cite the percentage to one decimal

point. To make reading easier and to

remind the reader that the results are

based on samples and subject to

sampling error, percentages from 10% to

90% will generally be shown rounded to

the nearest whole percentage. In this

report, percentages are not shown if the

sample denominator is fewer than 100

cases, or the numerator is fewer than 5

cases. When a percentage or other

statistic is not shown for this reason, the

table contains an asterisk (*) signifying

that the statistic does not meet standards

of reliability or precision. For most

statistics presented in this report, the

numerators and denominators are much

larger. This report presents basic

descriptive statistics on the ever-use and

discontinuation of specific contraceptive

methods in the United States in

2006–2010 and over time; the report

does not attempt to demonstrate

cause-and-effect relationships.

Results

Percentage of women who

have ever had sexual

intercourse and have ever

used contraception

Before discussing ever-use of

contraceptive methods, it is helpful to

define the group of women described in

the tables in this report. The tables

present ever-use of methods for the 53

million women aged 15–44 in the

United States who have ever had sexual

intercourse with a male, i.e., they are

sexually experienced women. Analysis is

limited to sexually experienced women

because the focus of the survey on

contraceptive use relates specifically to

pregnancy prevention and birth spacing.

Table A shows the percentage of all

women in various age groups who have

ever had sexual intercourse, the

percentage who have ever used

contraception (regardless of whether

they have had sex), and the percentage

of sexually experienced women who

have ever used a method of

contraception. In the second column, the

percentage of all women who have had

sexual intercourse is shown. For women

aged 25 and over, 97.8% have had

sexual intercourse. Among the full

sample of NSFG, 87% of women aged

15–44 have ever had sexual intercourse.

The third column of Table A shows

the percentage of all women—whether

they have had intercourse—who have

ever used contraception. Women may

take the pill or use another hormonal

Table A. Percentage of women aged 15–44 who have ever had sexual intercourse, percentage who have ever used contraception, and

percentage of sexually experienced women who have ever used contraception, by age: United States, 2006–2010

All women Sexually experienced women

Have had sexual

intercourse

Have used

contraception

Have used

contraception

Number in

thousands

Percentage

(standard error)

Percentage

(standard error)

Number in

thousands1

Percentage

(standard error)

All women, 15–44 years .......................

15–17 years .............................

18–19 years .............................

20–24 years .............................

25–44 years .............................

61,755

5,837

4,641

10,365

40,912

86.6 (0.7)

27.1 (1.8)

63.5 (2.6)

86.2 (1.7)

97.8 (0.3)

88.2 (0.6)

35.4 (2.0)

69.1 (2.7)

89.0 (1.4)

97.7 (0.3)

53,475

1,584

2,948

8,930

40,014

99.1 (0.1)

97.5 (1.5)

99.6 (0.2)

99.0 (0.3)

99.2 (0.1)

1

Computed on the basis of unrounded percentages.
Page 4	 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013

method not only as a contraceptive, but

to regulate their menstrual cycles or to

treat other health conditions that benefit

from taking estrogen (19,20). The

proportion of all women who have used

any contraceptive method rose from

35% among teenagers aged 15–17, to

69% at ages 18–19, to 89% at ages

20–24, and to 97.7% at ages 25–44,

paralleling the rise by age in the

percentage of women who have ever

had intercourse.

The percentage of women who have

used contraception exceeds the

percentage that have had intercourse

primarily at ages 15–17 and 18–19,

because small percentages of younger

women have used contraceptive methods

before first intercourse—typically to

treat acne, to regulate menstrual periods,

or to prepare for first intercourse

(19,20). Most importantly, among

women aged 15 and over who have had

sexual intercourse at least once, virtually

all have ever used contraception

(99.1%), including 97.5% of those aged

15–17.

Ever-use of contraceptive

methods among sexually

experienced women

Throughout their childbearing years,

women may use different contraceptive

methods to control when they have their

first birth, to limit the number of

children they bear, to control the

spacing of those children, and to prevent

sexually transmitted infections. In

2006–2010, 99.1% (53.0 million) of

sexually experienced women had used at

least one contraceptive method

(Table 1). This compares with 94.8% of

sexually experienced women in 1982,

and 98.2% in 1995 and 2002.

Table 1 also includes a summary

measure indicating women’s ever-use of

any highly effective, reversible method

of contraception for 2002 and 2006–

2010. This category includes the pill and

other hormonal methods such as

Norplant and Implanon (5- and 3-year

implants), Lunelle and Depo-Provera (1­

and 3-month injectables), the

contraceptive patch, the contraceptive

ring, and the IUD. Both hormonal and

nonhormonal IUDs are now available,

but the 2006–2010 NSFG did not ask

about the type of IUD used. Because

many of these methods were not

available in 1982 or had only recently

been approved in 1995 (13), this

summary measure was not calculated for

those years to avoid confounding limited

availability and nonuse. Male and

female sterilization, two other highly

effective contraceptive methods, are

generally nonreversible and are not

included in this measure; sterilization

data are shown separately.

The methods presented together in

the summary measure of any highly

effective, reversible method are also

shown individually in the table and

described in the results separately.

Because the use of highly effective,

reversible methods requires a woman to

see a medical professional to obtain the

method or the prescription for the

method, this summary measure also

serves as an indicator of the number and

percentage of women who have used

methods that require regular or periodic

contact with medical professionals. In

2006–2010, 88% of sexually

experienced women reported ever

having used a highly effective,

reversible method of contraception,

similar to 2002 (86%).

Hormonal method use

Hormonal methods include birth

control pills and most other highly

effective, reversible methods such as

implantable and injectable

contraceptives, contraceptive patches,

and contraceptive rings. Table 1 shows

the percentage of women who had ever

used each of these methods in 2006–

2010 and charts trends in use over time.

+	 About four of every five sexually

experienced women have used the

pill, and this percentage has remained

stable since 1995. Specifically, the

proportion of sexually experienced

women aged 15–44 who had ever

used the pill was 76% in 1982. In

1995, 2002, and 2006–2010, the pill

had been used by 82% of sexually

experienced women, remaining

constant even with the introduction of

additional highly effective, reversible

methods during this time period.

+	 Depo-Provera, a 3-month injectable

contraceptive first available in 1992,

had been used by 4.5% of women in

1995 and by 23% in 2006–2010.

+	 Ever-use of the contraceptive patch

increased from 0.9% in 2002 to 10%

in 2006–2010, and the contraceptive

ring (first asked about in the 2006–

2010 NSFG) had been used by 6.3%

of women.

Condom use

One of the most striking changes in

individual method use over time was the

increase in the proportion of women

who had ever had a male partner use the

condom—from 52% in 1982, to 82% in

1995, and 93.4% in 2006–2010 (Table 1,

Figure 1).

Other results

+	 Ever-use of the IUD declined from

1982 (18%) through 2002 (5.8%), but

increased between 2002 and 2006–

2010 (7.7%). The hormonal IUD

became an option during this time

period, but the type of IUD used was

not asked about in the survey.

+	 The ever-use of withdrawal also

increased significantly between 1982

and 2006–2010 (Figure 1). In 1982,

about 25% of sexually experienced

women had ever used withdrawal

compared with 60% in 2006–2010.

The increase in the use of withdrawal

may be associated with the increase

in condom use mentioned above,

because these methods are sometimes

used together. For example, looking

at current use rather than ever-use,

60% of women’s partners who used a

condom in the month of interview

also used withdrawal (analysis not

shown).

+	 Similar percentages of women had

ever used periodic abstinence by

calendar in 2006–2010 (18%) as had

in 1982 (17%).

+	 The use of barrier and spermicidal

periodic methods such as the

diaphragm, female condom, cervical

cap, foam, jelly, suppository, and

sponge either remained at low levels

or declined from 1982 to 2006–2010.

For example, 17% of women had

ever used the diaphragm in 1982, but
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013	 Page 5

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

Condom Withdrawal

1982 1995 2002 2006–2010

NOTE: Percentages are rounded to nearest whole number. 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010, and Table 1 of this report. Percent

52 

82 

90 

93 

25 

41 

56 

60 

Figure 1. Percentage of sexually experienced women aged 15–44 whose partner has ever

used a condom or withdrawal: United States, 1982–2010

this proportion decreased to 3.1% by

2006–2010.

+ By 2006–2010, 11% of women had

used emergency contraception.

To gain additional understanding of

the contraceptive methods ever used by

women shown in Table 1, Table B shows

the median and percent distribution of

the number of contraceptive methods

ever used among the 53.5 million

sexually experienced women aged

15–44 in the United States. As

mentioned previously, women may

switch methods as their reasons for

contraceptive use change, such as

delaying a first pregnancy or spacing

between one pregnancy and the next,

helping prevent sexually transmitted

infections, or discontinuing a method

due to dissatisfaction. Table B shows

that the median number of methods used

for all women is 3.1. Less than 1% of

women aged 15 and over who have ever

had sex have never used any method,

5.4% have used one method, 15% have

used two methods, 26% have used three,

23% have used four, and about 29%

have used five or more (Table B,

Figure 2).

Women use additional methods as

they age; around age 25, the pace of

using additional methods plateaus at a

median of slightly more than three.

Nearly one-half of these women have

used three or four methods. Among the

oldest age group, 40–44, 1.3% of

women have not used any contraceptive

method.

Differences by Hispanic

origin and race

Differences in the proportion of

sexually experienced women who have

ever used specific methods of

contraception by Hispanic origin and

race, and by nativity for Hispanic

women, are shown in Table 2. The

proportion who have ever used any

method of contraception ranges from

97.1%–99.6% across the groups, and the

following differences are seen:

+	 White women (91.3%) have most

frequently used any highly effective,

reversible method, compared with

81% of all Hispanic women and 63%

of Asian women (Figure 3 and

Table 2).

+	 A higher proportion of white women

(89%) have used the pill compared

with all other racial and ethnic groups

(Figure 4 and Table 2).

+	 Black women (44%) and Hispanic

women (38%) have the highest

proportions of those who had ever

used a hormonal method other than

Table B. Median and percent distribution of the number of contraceptive methods ever used among sexually experienced women aged

15–44: United States, 2006–2010

Median

Number of number of

women in methods 6 or

thousands used Total 0 1 2 3 4 5 more

Percent distribution (standard error)

Total ....................... 53,475 3.1 (0.04) 100.0 0.9 (0.1) 5.4 (0.4) 15.4 (0.6) 26.1 (0.7) 23.4 (0.7) 15.4 (0.6) 13.4 (0.5)

Age
 

15–17 years ................... 1,584 1.9 (0.10) 100.0 2.5 (1.5) 20.0 (2.6) 29.4 (3.0) 29.7 (2.6) 13.2 (2.1) 3.4 (1.0) 1.9 (0.7)
 

18–19 years ................... 2,948 2.4 (0.08) 100.0 0.4 (0.2) 8.6 (1.4) 30.5 (2.1) 29.5 (2.4) 19.8 (2.1) 6.4 (1.1) 4.7 (1.0)
 

20–24 years ................... 8,930 2.8 (0.07) 100.0 1.0 (0.3) 6.5 (1.0) 19.1 (1.3) 28.8 (1.7) 23.6 (1.5) 12.3 (1.3) 8.7 (0.9)
 

25–44 years ................... 40,014 3.3 (0.04) 100.0 0.8 (0.1) 4.3 (0.4) 12.9 (0.6) 25.1 (0.7) 24.1 (0.7) 17.3 (0.7) 15.5 (0.6)
 

25–29 years ................. 10,088 3.1 (0.07) 100.0 0.6 (0.2) 4.6 (0.7) 15.5 (1.2) 27.1 (1.3) 23.6 (1.4) 17.0 (1.2) 11.5 (1.0)
 

30–34 years ................. 8,990 3.2 (0.06) 100.0 0.9 (0.3) 4.6 (0.6) 14.5 (1.2) 24.0 (1.3) 24.7 (1.3) 17.7 (1.5) 13.7 (1.1)
 

35–39 years ................. 10,401 3.3 (0.06) 100.0 0.6 (0.2) 4.9 (0.9) 11.9 (1.1) 24.7 (1.3) 25.1 (1.4) 17.4 (1.3) 15.4 (1.1)
 

40–44 years ................. 10,535 3.5 (0.09) 100.0 1.3 (0.3) 3.3 (0.7) 9.8 (1.0) 24.6 (1.6) 23.1 (1.7) 17.1 (1.3) 21.0 (1.5)
 
Page 6	 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

1 

5 

15 

26 

23 

15 

13

Percent 

0 1 2 3 

Number of methods 

4 5 6 or more 

NOTES: Percentages are rounded to nearest whole number. Percentages do not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010, and Table B of this report. 

Figure 2. Percent distribution of the number of methods ever used among sexually

experienced women aged 15–44: United States, 2006–2010

0 

Hispanic origin and nativity and race 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

Non-Hispanic 

Asian 

Non-Hispanic 

black 

Non-Hispanic 

white 

Hispanic, 

foreign born 

Hispanic, 

U.S. born 

Percent 

NOTES: Highly effective, reversible contraceptive methods include birth control pills, implants, injectables, contraceptive 

rings, contraceptive patches, and intrauterine devices (IUD). Percentages are rounded to nearest whole number. 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010, and Table 2 of this report. 

82 80 

91 

86 

63 

Figure 3. Percentage of sexually experienced women aged 15–44 who have ever used any

highly effective, reversible contraceptive method, by Hispanic origin and nativity and

race: United States, 2006–2010

the pill, whereas Asian women (19%) + About 27% of Hispanic and 34% of

have the lowest (Figure 4 and black women have ever used

Table 2). Depo-Provera, compared with 20% of

white women and 10% of Asian

women (Table 2).

+	 Foreign-born Hispanic women were

up to three times as likely to have

used IUDs (20%) compared with all

other groups (7.6% of U.S.-born

Hispanic women, 6.8% of white

women, 5.5% of black women, and

4.6% of Asian women) (Figure 4 and

Table 2).

+	 Most white (96.5%) and black

(95.7%) women have had a partner

use a condom during sexual

intercourse. By comparison, 75% of

foreign-born Hispanic women, 89%

of U.S.-born Hispanic women, and

88% of Asian women have ever had

a partner use a condom.

+	 As shown in Table 2, one in three

Asian women (35%) had ever used

the calendar method of periodic

abstinence for pregnancy prevention.

This percentage is approximately

double the percentages of other racial

groups.

+	 White women (64%), U.S.-born

Hispanic women (60%), and black

women (55%) are more likely to have

had a partner who had used

withdrawal compared with foreignborn Hispanic women (44%).

Ever-use by education

Ever-use of contraceptive methods

is shown among sexually experienced

women aged 22–44 by educational

attainment (Table 3). The percentage of

women in each education group who

have ever used any method; any highly

effective, reversible method; and any of

the individual methods are presented.

The percentage of women in each

education group who have ever used

any method is similar, around 99%, but

these groups vary in the percentages that

have used particular methods.

+	 The percentage of women who have

used female sterilization decreased

with greater educational attainment.

The percentage was 40% for women

with less than a high school diploma,

and 7.4% for women with a master’s

degree or higher (Table 3 and

Figure 5).
Pill Other hormonal method IUD

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

Percent 

NOTES: Other hormonal methods include implants, injectables, contraceptive patches, and contraceptive rings. IUD is 

intrauterine device. Percentages are rounded to nearest whole number. 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010, and Table 2 of this report. 

Hispanic origin and nativity and race 

Non-Hispanic 

Asian 

Non-Hispanic 

black 

Non-Hispanic 

white 

Hispanic, 

foreign born 

Hispanic, 

U.S. born 

73 

39 

8 

62 

20 

38 

89 

31 

7 

78 

44 

6 

57 

19 

5 

National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013	 Page 7

Figure 4. Percentage of sexually experienced women aged 15–44 who have ever used

birth control pills, other hormonal methods, or IUDs, by Hispanic origin and nativity and

race: United States, 2006–2010

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

Female sterilization Pill Other hormonal method

Master's degree 

or higher 

Bachelor's 

degree 

Some college, 

no bachelor's 

degree 

High school 

diploma or 

GED 

No high school 

diploma or 

GED 

NOTES: Other hormonal methods include implants, injectables, contraceptive patches, and contraceptive rings. 

Percentages are rounded to nearest whole number. 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010, and Table 3 of this report. 

Education 

Percent

40 

33 

84 

37 

20 

88 

37 

10 

87 

26 

7 

87 

18 

77 

45 

Figure 5. Percentage of sexually experienced women aged 22–44 who have ever used

female sterilization, birth control pills, or other hormonal methods, by education:

United States, 2006–2010

+ Fewer women without a high school with higher levels of education (e.g.,

diploma or GED have ever used the 87% for women with a bachelor’s

pill (77%) compared with women

degree or higher) (Table 3 and

Figure 5).

+	 Although use of the pill is lower

among women with less education,

they report higher ever-use of other

hormonal methods (Table 3 and

Figure 5). Nearly one-half of women

with less than a high school

education reported use of other

hormonal methods (45%) compared

with 18% of women with a master’s

degree or higher.

+	 Among the other hormonal methods,

the highest percentages of women

used Depo-Provera, ranging from

36% for women with less than a high

school diploma to 8.6% for women

with a master’s degree or higher

(Table 3). Women with a high school

diploma and those with some college

attendance but no bachelor’s degree

had similar levels of ever-use of

Depo-Provera (27%).

+	 The ever-use of periodic abstinence

methods for pregnancy prevention

increased with educational attainment.

The percentage who had ever used

calendar rhythm types of periodic

abstinence (counting the days from

the start of the last menstrual period)

was 13% among women with less

than a high school diploma, compared

with 28% among women with a

master’s degree or higher. Similarly,

2.9% of women in the lowestattaining education group had used

natural family planning (basal body

temperature or cervical mucus tests),

compared with 12% of women with a

master’s degree or higher.

Ever-use by current religious

affiliation

There is a substantial body of

research on the association of religious

affiliation with contraceptive use

(21,22). Previous research shows

differences in the use of particular

methods by religious affiliation, but high

levels of overall contraceptive use

among all groups (21,22). The findings

in Table 4, which shows the percentage

of sexually experienced women who

have ever used any method of

contraception; any highly effective,

reversible method; and selected
Page 8 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013

individual methods by current religious

affiliation, are consistent with previous

research. Religious affiliation is

classified into four broad groups: 1) no

religious affiliation, 2) Catholic, 3)

Baptist and fundamentalist Protestant

denominations, and 4) other Protestant

denominations. The diverse group of

other religious affiliations is not shown

separately, but is included in the total.

In each of the groups shown, 99% of

women aged 15–44 who have ever had

sexual intercourse have ever used a

contraceptive method. Specifically,

98.6% of Catholic women, 99.4% of

women with no religious affiliation,

99.4% of women affiliated with a

Baptist or fundamentalist Protestant

denomination, and 99.5% of women

affiliated with other Protestant

denominations had ever used a method.

The percentage of Catholic women

who had ever used a condom with a

male partner was 89%, compared with

94.6%–96.6% of the Protestant groups.

About 22% of Catholic women had ever

used a periodic abstinence method,

compared with 18%–19% of the other

groups. And about 76% of Catholic

women had ever used the pill, compared

with 86% of the Protestant groups.

Discontinuation of

contraceptive methods

One reason women may switch to a

new method of contraception is if they

are dissatisfied with their current

method. Overall, 47% of women who

have used at least one method of

contraception have discontinued using a

method due to dissatisfaction (analysis

not shown), but there is wide variation

in discontinuation among specific

methods. Table 5 and Figure 6 show the

percentage of women who have ever

discontinued using the pill, the condom,

Depo-Provera, or the contraceptive patch

due to dissatisfaction among those who

have ever used the method. Table 5 also

shows women’s reasons for

discontinuation of the method. Women

could give more than one reason. Only

cases where a woman stopped using one

of the contraceptive methods shown

because of dissatisfaction and not

because she wanted to become pregnant

are presented. Women who stopped

using one brand or formulation of a

particular method due to dissatisfaction,

but then used another, are included.

Of the 45 million women who have

ever used the pill, 30% discontinued use

because of dissatisfaction. Nearly

one-half of the 12.5 million women who

had used Depo-Provera (46%) and the

5.6 million women who had used the

contraceptive patch (49%) discontinued

use due to dissatisfaction. This compares

with 9.3% of the 50 million women

whose partners had used the condom.

The most common reasons for

discontinuation of the condom due to

dissatisfaction were that usage decreased

their sexual pleasure (43%), their partner

did not like using condoms (41%), and

concern that the method would not work

(17%).

Of the women who had ever used

and discontinued using Depo-Provera,

74% cited side effects as a reason. The

second most frequently given reason

was that women did not like the

changes to their menstrual cycles (31%).

Side effects were also the most

commonly cited reason why women

discontinued use of the other two

hormonal methods—63% among those

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

Pill 

30 

Condom 

9 

Patch 

46 

Depo-Provera 

49 

NOTE: Percentages are rounded to nearest whole number. 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010, and Table 5 of this report. Percent 

Figure 6. Percentage of women aged 15–44 who discontinued use of the selected

contraceptive method among women who had ever used that method: United States,

2006–2010

who discontinued using the pill and

45% among those who discontinued

using the contraceptive patch.

Summary and

Discussion

This report provides a description of

the ever-use of contraceptive methods

among sexually experienced women

aged 15–44 with the most recent data

available from 2006–2010. Information

is presented on the types and number of

methods women have used at any time

in the past up to when they were

interviewed, as well as similarities and

differences in contraceptive method use

by Hispanic origin and race, Hispanic

nativity, education, and religious

affiliation. The most substantial results

presented in this report can be grouped

into four broad areas.

First, virtually all (99.1%) sexually

experienced women have ever used

contraception. This holds true across the

groups described here. Additionally,

nearly 9 out of 10 sexually experienced

women reported ever having used a

highly effective, reversible method of

birth control. This, however, does not

mean that they always or consistently
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013	 Page 9

used a form of contraception when

trying to avoid a pregnancy. Sexually

experienced women aged 15–44 used a

median of three methods.

Second, women are increasingly

using the newer methods (those

available in roughly the last two

decades). For example, by 2006–2010,

nearly one in four sexually experienced

women had ever used the Depo-Provera

injectable, introduced in 1992. However,

ever-use of the birth control pill,

available since 1960, has remained

stable in the last 15 years (about four

out of five women), despite increased

availability of highly effective, hormonal

alternatives. Additionally, use of some

older, coital-dependent methods remains

high. Nearly all women have ever had a

partner who used condoms (93.4%),

which in addition to contraceptive

benefits, also help prevent sexually

transmitted infections.

Third, whereas similar percentages

of women have ever used any method

of contraception across race and across

education groups, there is substantial

variation in the specific types of

methods ever used. This variation has

potential implications for group

differences in unintended pregnancies

(23–25). For example, Asian and

Hispanic women are less likely to have

ever used highly effective, reversible

methods compared with women of other

racial backgrounds. Additionally,

foreign-born Hispanic women are more

likely to have used an IUD and less

likely to have had a partner who used a

condom. Looking at education, similar

percentages of women in each education

group have ever used at least one highly

effective method, but differences in the

use of specific methods are shown. For

example, female sterilization is

approximately four times as common

among women without a high school

diploma or GED compared with those

with a bachelor’s degree. Ever-use of

Depo-Provera is nearly three times as

common among women without a high

school diploma or GED compared with

those with a bachelor’s degree.

Finally, among the 45 million

women who have used the pill, 30%

(13.7 million) discontinued use because

of dissatisfaction with the method—

most often because of side effects

(63%), concerns about side effects

(12%), menstrual cycle changes (12%),

and because the method failed and they

became pregnant (11%). Side effects

were also given as the most common

reason for discontinuation of DepoProvera and the patch among women

who had ever discontinued using these

methods due to dissatisfaction.

This report on the ever-use of

contraception, coupled with a previous

report on current use (9), provides two

pieces of the portrait of contraceptive

use. The first report by Jones et al.

describes usage at the date of the

interview for all women and gives a

detailed view of usage among currently

contracepting women at one point in

time. This report adds to that research

by describing contraceptive use

throughout women’s lives up to the date

of the interview among all sexually

experienced women. This report

provides information on the types and

number of methods women have ever

used, provides the percentage and

number of women who try certain

contraceptive methods and discontinue

using them because of dissatisfaction,

and offers some indication of the

population of women exposed to the

health benefits and risks of various

contraceptive methods. Finally, this

report provides a description of ever-use

of the condom during a period of

heightened awareness and concern for

preventing sexually transmitted

infections, including HIV.

References

1.Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of

contraception in the United States:

1982–2008. National Center for

Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat

23(29). 2010. Available from:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/

sr_23/sr23_029.pdf.

2.Chandra A, Martinez GM, Mosher

WD, et al. Fertility, family planning,

and reproductive health of U.S.

women: Data from the 2002 National

Survey of Family Growth. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

Health Stat 23(25). 2005. Available

from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/

series/sr_23/sr23_025.pdf.

3.Mosher WD, Martinez GM, Chandra

A, et al. Use of contraception and

use of family planning services in the

United States, 1982–2002. Advance

data from vital and health statistics;

no 350. Hyattsville, MD: National

Center for Health Statistics. 2004.

Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/

nchs/data/ad/ad350.pdf.

4.Martinez GM, Daniels K, Chandra A.

Fertility of men and women aged

15–44 years in the United States:

National Survey of Family Growth,

2006–2010. National health statistics

reports; no 51. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2012. Available from: http://www.

cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr051.pdf.

5.Martinez G, Copen CE, Abma JC.

Teenagers in the United States:

Sexual activity, contraceptive use,

and childbearing, 2006–2010

National Survey of Family Growth.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 23(31). 2011.

Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/

nchs/data/series/sr_23/sr23_031.pdf.

6.Copen CE, Daniels K, Vespa J,

Mosher WD. First marriages in the

United States: Data from the

2006–2010 National Survey of

Family Growth. National health

statistics reports; no 49. Hyattsville,

MD: National Center for Health

Statistics. 2012. Available from:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/

nhsr049.pdf.

7.Groves RM, Mosher WD, Lepkowski

JM, Kirgis NG. Planning and

development of the continuous

National Survey of Family Growth.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 1(48). 2009.

Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/

nchs/data/series/sr_01/sr01_048.pdf.

8.Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis

KE, et al. The 2006–2010 National

Survey of Family Growth: Sample

design and analysis of a continuous

survey. National Center for Health

Statistics. Vital Health Stat 2(150).

2010. Available from: http://www.

cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_02/

sr02_150.pdf.

9.Jones J, Mosher WD, Daniels K.

Current contraceptive use in the

United States, 2006–2010, and

changes in patterns of use since

1995. National health statistics

reports; no 60. National Center for

Health Statistics. 2012. Available
Page 10 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013

from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/

nhsr/nhsr060.pdf.

10. Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson AL,

Cates J, Stewart F, Kowal D.

Contraceptive technology. Revised

18th Edition. New York: Ardent

Media. 2004.

11. Achievements in public health,

1900–1999: Family planning.

MMWR 48(47):1073–80. Dec 3,

1999. Available from: http://

www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/

mmwrhtml/mm4847a1.htm.

12. Committee on Preventive Services

for Women, Institute of Medicine.

Clinical Preventive Services for

Women: Closing the Gaps. 2011.

Available from: http://www.iom.edu/

Reports/2011/Clinical-PreventiveServices-for-Women-Closing-theGaps.aspx.

13. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Drugs@FDA: FDA approved drug

products. 2012. Available from:

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/

cder/drugsatfda/index.cfm.

14. Kost K, Singh S, Vaughan B,

Trussell J, Bankole A. Estimates of

contraceptive failure from the 2002

National Survey of Family Growth.

Contraception 77(1):10–21. 2008.

15. Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in

the United States. Contraception

83(5):397–404. 2011.

16. Potter FJ, Iannacchione VG, Mosher

WD, et al. Sample design, sampling

weights, imputation, and variance

estimation in the 1995 National

Survey of Family Growth. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

Health Stat 2(124). 1998. Available

from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/

series/sr_02/sr02_124.pdf.

17. Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis

KE, et al. National Survey of Family

Growth, Cycle 6: Sample design,

weighting, imputation, and variance

estimation. National Center for

Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat

2(142). 2006. Available from:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/

sr_02/sr02_142.pdf.

18. Bachrach CA, Horn MC, Mosher

WD, Shimizu I. National Survey of

Family Growth, Cycle III: Sample

design, weighting, and variance

estimation. National Center for

Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat

2(98). 1985. Available from:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/

sr_02/sr02_098.pdf.

19. Kaunitz AM. Oral contraceptive

health benefits: Perception versus

reality. Contraception 59(1):29S–33S.

1999.

20. Maguire K, Westhoff C. The state of

hormonal contraception today:

Established and emerging

noncontraceptive health benefits. Am

J Obstet Gynecol 205(4):S4–8. 2011.

21. Goldscheider C, Mosher WD.

Patterns of contraceptive use in the

United States: The importance of

religious factors. Stud Fam Plann

22(2):102–15. 1991.

22. Jones RK, Dreweke J. Countering

conventional wisdom: New evidence

on religion and contraceptive use.

New York: Guttmacher Institute.

2011.

23. Finer LB, Henshaw SK. Disparities

in rates of unintended pregnancy in

the United States, 1994 and 2001.

Perspect Sex Reprod Health

38(2):90–6. 2006.

24. Finer LB, Zolna MR. Unintended

pregnancy in the United States:

incidence and disparities, 2006.

Contraception 84(5):478–85. 2011.

25. Mosher WD, Jones J, Abma JC.

Intended and unintended births in the

United States: 1982–2010. National

health statistics reports; no 55.

National Center for Health Statistics.

2012. Available from: http://

www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/

nhsr055.pdf.

26. Office of Management and Budget.

Revisions to the standards for the

classification of federal data on race

and ethnicity. Fed Regist

62FR58781–90. Statistical policy

directive 15. 1997. Available from:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/

fedreg_1997standards/.
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013 Page 11

Table 1. Number of women aged 15–44 who have ever had sexual intercourse and percentage who have ever used the selected

contraceptive method: United States, 1982, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2010

Contraceptive method 1982 1995 2002 2006–2010

Number in thousands

All sexually experienced women .................. 46,684 53,800 54,190 53,475

Method Percentage (standard error)

Any method ............................... 94.8 (0.4) 98.2 (0.2) 98.2 (0.2) 99.1 (0.1)

Female sterilization .......................... 22.3 (0.8) 23.4 (0.5) 20.7 (0.7) 19.5 (0.9)

Male sterilization ............................ 10.1 (0.6) 14.6 (0.4) 13.0 (0.7) 13.3 (0.7)

Any highly effective, reversible method1 ....... ....... . . . . . . 85.5 (0.6) 87.5 (0.6)

Pill ................................... 76.3 (0.8) 82.2 (0.5) 82.3 (0.6) 81.9 (0.7)

Other hormonal methods ..................... . . . . . . 18.9 (0.9) 33.8 (0.9)

Norplant or Implanon implant.................. --­ 2.1 (0.2) 2.1 (0.2) 1.9 (0.2)

1-month injectable (Lunelle) .................. --­ --­ 0.9 (0.1) 1.6 (0.3)

3-month injectable (Depo-Provera) .............. --­ 4.5 (0.2) 16.8 (0.8) 23.2 (0.8)

Contraceptive patch ....................... --­ --­ 0.9 (0.1) 10.4 (0.6)

Contraceptive ring ........................ --­ --­ --­ 6.3 (0.4)

Intrauterine device (IUD)2 .......... .......... 18.4 (0.8) 10.0 (0.4) 5.8 (0.4) 7.7 (0.5)

Emergency contraception....................... --­ 0.8 (0.1) 4.2 (0.3) 10.8 (0.5)

Today sponge .............................. --­ 12.0 (0.4) 7.3 (0.4) 4.3 (0.3)

Diaphragm................................ 17.1 (0.8) 15.2 (0.5) 8.5 (0.5) 3.1 (0.3)

Condom ................................. 51.8 (1.0) 82.0 (0.5) 89.7 (0.6) 93.4 (0.5)

Female condom ............................ --­ 1.2 (0.1) 1.9 (0.2) 1.7 (0.2)

Periodic abstinence, calendar rhythm ............... 17.0 (0.8) 24.3 (0.5) 16.2 (0.6) 18.1 (0.6)

Periodic abstinence, natural family planning3..... ..... 2.3 (0.3) 4.2 (0.3) 3.5 (0.3) 4.1 (0.3)

Withdrawal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.5 (0.8) 40.6 (0.6) 56.1 (1.0) 59.6 (0.9)

Foam alone ............................... 24.9 (0.8) 18.3 (0.5) 12.1 (0.4) 6.8 (0.4)

Jelly or cream alone .......................... 5.8 (0.4) 9.1 (0.3) 7.3 (0.4) 4.2 (0.3)

Suppository or insert.......................... 9.7 (0.6) 10.6 (0.3) 7.5 (0.5) 3.4 (0.3)

Other methods4 ............................ 9.3 (0.6) 0.3 (0.1) 1.0 (0.1) 0.8 (0.1)

. . . Category not applicable. The percentage was not calculated (see text for details).

- - - Data not available (method not available in the United States in that year).

1

Includes birth control pills, Norplant and Implanon implants, 1-month (Lunelle) and 3-month (Depo-Provera) injectables, contraceptive patches, contraceptive rings, and IUDs.

2

Women reporting IUD use may have used a hormonal IUD or a nonhormonal IUD. Because this information is unknown, IUD is not included in ‘‘Other hormonal methods’’ category.

3

Includes safe period by basal body temperature or by cervical mucus test.

4

Includes the cervical cap and other methods.

NOTE: Percentages (standard errors) for 1982, 1995, and 2002 are from Mosher et al., 2004, Table 1.
Page 12 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013

Table 2. Number of sexually experienced women aged 15–44 and percentage who have ever used the selected contraceptive method, by

Hispanic origin and nativity and race: United States, 2006–2010

Hispanic Non-Hispanic

Black or

African

Total Hispanic, Hispanic, White, American, Asian,

Contraceptive method Total1 Hispanic U.S. born foreign born single race single race single race

Number in thousands

All sexually experienced women ................ 53,475 9,119 4,398 4,721 32,432 7,383 1,966

Percentage (standard error)

Any method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99.1 (0.1) 97.9 (0.5) 98.8 (0.5) 97.1 (0.8) 99.6 (0.1) 99.0 (0.4) 98.3 (0.7)

Female sterilization ........................ 19.5 (0.9) 22.7 (2.1) 19.3 (2.4) 26.0 (2.3) 18.2 (1.1) 23.8 (1.8) 8.2 (2.8)

Male sterilization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.3 (0.7) 6.7 (0.8) 6.9 (1.1) 6.4 (1.0) 17.8 (0.9) 4.6 (0.6) 7.2 (2.2)

Any highly effective, reversible method2 . . . . . .. . . . . . 87.5 (0.6) 80.8 (1.2) 81.5 (1.8) 80.2 (1.7) 91.3 (0.6) 85.9 (1.1) 62.6 (4.7)

Pill ................................. 81.9 (0.7) 66.8 (1.6) 72.6 (2.1) 61.5 (2.0) 88.5 (0.6) 77.8 (1.3) 56.9 (4.6)

Other hormonal methods ................... 33.8 (0.9) 38.2 (1.8) 38.6 (2.0) 37.9 (2.7) 30.5 (1.2) 44.1 (1.8) 19.3 (3.4)

Norplant or Implanon implant ............... 1.9 (0.2) 1.0 (0.3) 1.0 (0.3) 1.1 (0.5) 1.8 (0.3) 2.7 (0.5) * *

1-month injectable (Lunelle) ................ 1.6 (0.3) 5.8 (1.3) 3.7 (1.6) 7.8 (1.3) 0.6 (0.1) 0.7 (0.2) * *

3-month injectable (Depo-Provera)............ 23.2 (0.8) 27.2 (1.9) 27.4 (1.9) 27.0 (2.9) 20.0 (1.0) 33.6 (1.7) 10.2 (2.8)

Contraceptive patch ..................... 10.4 (0.6) 10.4 (1.5) 12.0 (1.6) 9.0 (1.8) 9.5 (0.7) 15.1 (1.0) 4.5 (1.8)

Contraceptive ring ..................... 6.3 (0.4) 4.7 (0.7) 6.3 (1.2) 3.3 (0.8) 7.0 (0.5) 6.7 (0.8) 5.4 (1.9)

Intrauterine device (IUD)3 .................... 7.7 (0.5) 13.8 (0.9) 7.6 (1.1) 19.5 (1.7) 6.8 (0.7) 5.5 (0.8) 4.6 (1.7)

Emergency contraception .................... 10.8 (0.5) 11.4 (0.8) 16.1 (1.7) 7.0 (0.9) 11.0 (0.7) 7.9 (0.9) 15.6 (2.9)

Today sponge ........................... 4.3 (0.3) 1.2 (0.3) 2.3 (0.7) 0.2 (0.1) 5.7 (0.5) 2.8 (0.5) * *

Diaphragm ............................. 3.1 (0.3) 1.5 (0.4) 2.2 (0.7) 1.0 (0.4) 3.8 (0.4) 2.0 (0.4) 3.1 (1.8)

Condom ............................... 93.4 (0.5) 81.9 (1.3) 89.3 (1.5) 74.9 (1.7) 96.5 (0.4) 95.7 (0.7) 88.3 (2.3)

Female condom .......................... 1.7 (0.2) 1.6 (0.3) 1.9 (0.6) 1.2 (0.4) 0.9 (0.2) 5.7 (0.9) * *

Periodic abstinence, calendar rhythm ............. 18.1 (0.6) 17.1 (1.2) 14.5 (1.8) 19.5 (1.4) 17.8 (0.9) 16.8 (1.0) 34.5 (3.9)

Periodic abstinence, natural family planning4 ........ 4.1 (0.3) 3.0 (0.6) 2.4 (0.7) 3.5 (0.8) 4.5 (0.4) 3.0 (0.5) 7.8 (2.3)

Withdrawal ............................. 59.6 (0.9) 51.9 (1.6) 60.2 (2.1) 44.2 (2.6) 63.5 (1.1) 54.9 (1.3) 51.6 (4.0)

Foam alone............................. 6.8 (0.4) 3.3 (0.5) 4.6 (0.9) 2.1 (0.4) 8.2 (0.6) 6.4 (0.8) * *

Jelly or cream alone ....................... 4.2 (0.3) 2.3 (0.5) 4.2 (1.0) 0.5 (0.2) 4.9 (0.4) 4.5 (0.8) 1.7 (0.7)

Suppository or insert ....................... 3.4 (0.3) 3.0 (0.5) 3.8 (1.0) 2.2 (0.6) 3.6 (0.4) 3.9 (0.6) * *

Other methods5 .......................... 0.8 (0.1) 0.3 (0.2) * * * * 1.0 (0.2) 0.3 (0.2) * *

* Figure does not meet standards of reliability or precision.

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.

2

Includes birth control pills, Norplant and Implanon implants, 1-month (Lunelle) and 3-month (Depo-Provera) injectables, contraceptive patches, contraceptive rings, and IUDs.

3

Women reporting IUD use may have used a hormonal IUD or a nonhormonal IUD. Because this information is unknown, IUD is not included in ‘‘Other hormonal methods’’ category.

4

Includes safe period by basal body temperature or by cervical mucus test.

5

Includes the cervical cap and other methods.
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013 Page 13

Table 3. Number of sexually experienced women aged 22–44 and percentage who have ever used the selected contraceptive method, by

education: United States, 2006–2010

Bachelor’s degree or higher

No high High Some

school school college, no Master’s

diploma diploma bachelor’s Bachelor’s degree or

Contraceptive method Total or GED or GED degree Total degree higher

Number in thousands

All sexually experienced women .................. 45,552 6,796 11,377 13,144 14,235 10,390 3,845

Method Percentage (standard error)

Any method ............................... 99.2 (0.1) 98.5 (0.5) 98.8 (0.3) 99.6 (0.1) 99.3 (0.2) 99.3 (0.2) 99.3 (0.4)

Female sterilization .......................... 22.9 (1.0) 40.2 (2.2) 32.8 (1.7) 19.9 (1.2) 9.5 (1.1) 10.3 (1.4) 7.4 (1.4)

Male sterilization ............................ 15.3 (0.8) 9.5 (1.6) 17.0 (1.3) 17.3 (1.2) 14.8 (1.3) 14.8 (1.5) 14.8 (2.3)

Any highly effective, reversible method1 ....... ....... 89.9 (0.6) 87.3 (1.4) 90.3 (1.0) 92.0 (0.8) 88.9 (1.0) 89.1 (1.1) 88.3 (1.8)

Pill ................................... 85.1 (0.7) 76.5 (1.7) 84.3 (1.2) 88.2 (1.0) 87.1 (1.0) 87.2 (1.2) 86.7 (1.8)

Other hormonal methods ..................... 33.9 (1.0) 44.6 (1.9) 36.9 (1.6) 37.1 (1.7) 23.6 (1.4) 25.9 (1.6) 17.5 (2.1)

Norplant or Implanon implant.................. 2.1 (0.3) 1.9 (0.4) 3.0 (0.6) 2.7 (0.5) 0.9 (0.3) 1.1 (0.4) *

1-month injectable (Lunelle) .................. 1.8 (0.3) 5.1 (1.3) 1.9 (0.6) 1.1 (0.2) 0.7 (0.2) 0.8 (0.3) *

3-month injectable (Depo-Provera) .............. 23.4 (0.9) 36.0 (2.0) 26.8 (1.6) 26.5 (1.6) 11.9 (1.0) 13.1 (1.4) 8.6 (1.5)

Contraceptive patch ....................... 10.0 (0.6) 11.0 (1.4) 10.9 (1.0) 10.6 (0.9) 8.2 (0.9) 8.6 (0.9) 7.1 (1.5)

Contraceptive ring ........................ 6.5 (0.4) 3.2 (0.5) 5.0 (0.7) 7.5 (0.7) 8.3 (0.8) 9.5 (1.1) 5.1 (1.1)

Intrauterine device (IUD)2 .......... .......... 8.4 (0.5) 11.0 (1.1) 8.5 (0.9) 8.8 (0.9) 6.7 (0.8) 6.1 (0.9) 8.4 (1.7)

Emergency contraception....................... 9.5 (0.5) 5.5 (0.8) 7.1 (0.8) 11.0 (0.9) 11.9 (0.9) 11.5 (1.1) 12.8 (1.8)

Today sponge .............................. 4.9 (0.4) 1.4 (0.4) 3.2 (0.6) 6.4 (0.7) 6.6 (0.7) 5.6 (0.8) 9.3 (1.6)

Diaphragm................................ 3.6 (0.3) 1.3 (0.4) 3.1 (0.6) 4.2 (0.6) 4.5 (0.6) 4.7 (0.8) 4.2 (1.0)

Condom ................................. 92.9 (0.5) 83.6 (1.9) 92.0 (0.8) 95.4 (0.6) 95.9 (0.7) 95.8 (0.8) 96.0 (1.2)

Female condom ............................ 1.8 (0.2) 3.3 (0.7) 1.9 (0.4) 1.5 (0.3) 1.3 (0.3) 1.2 (0.4) 1.4 (0.6)

Periodic abstinence, calendar rhythm ............... 18.9 (0.7) 12.6 (1.4) 16.4 (1.2) 19.0 (1.4) 23.7 (1.5) 22.0 (1.5) 28.2 (2.7)

Periodic abstinence, natural family planning3..... ..... 4.6 (0.4) 2.9 (0.7) 3.0 (0.6) 4.1 (0.6) 7.3 (0.8) 5.6 (0.8) 11.9 (2.1)

Withdrawal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59.9 (0.9) 50.9 (2.4) 61.7 (1.6) 64.2 (1.7) 58.8 (1.5) 59.1 (2.0) 58.3 (2.3)

Foam alone ............................... 7.8 (0.5) 7.7 (1.1) 8.1 (0.9) 8.3 (0.8) 7.2 (0.8) 6.6 (0.8) 8.8 (1.5)

Jelly or cream alone .......................... 4.7 (0.4) 2.8 (0.7) 4.3 (0.7) 5.6 (0.8) 5.0 (0.5) 4.4 (0.5) 6.7 (1.4)

Suppository or insert.......................... 3.9 (0.3) 2.9 (0.7) 3.7 (0.7) 4.8 (0.7) 3.7 (0.4) 2.9 (0.5) 6.0 (1.2)

Other methods4

.............. .............. 0.8 (0.2) 1.1 (0.5) 0.8 (0.3) 0.7 (0.2) 0.9 (0.2) 0.7 (0.2) 1.3 (0.4)

* Figure does not meet standards of reliability or precision.

1

Includes birth control pills, Norplant and Implanon implants, 1-month (Lunelle) and 3-month (Depo-Provera) injectables, contraceptive patches, contraceptive rings, and IUDs.

2

Women reporting IUD use may have used a hormonal IUD or a nonhormonal IUD. Because this information is unknown, IUD is not included in ‘‘Other hormonal methods’’ category.

3

Includes safe period by basal body temperature or by cervical mucus test.

4

Includes the cervical cap and other methods.

Table 4. Number of sexually experienced women aged 15–44 and percentage who have ever used the selected contraceptive method, by

current religious affiliation: United States, 2006–2010

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

Any

method

Any highly

effective,

reversible

method1 Pill

Other

hormonal

method2 IUD3 Condom

Any

periodic

abstinence4

Percentage (standard error)

Total5 ................. ................. 53,475 99.1 (0.1) 87.5 (0.6) 81.9 (0.7) 33.8 (0.9) 7.7 (0.5) 93.4 (0.5) 19.7 (0.7)

Current religious affiliation

None ...................................

Catholic .................................

Baptist and fundamentalist Protestant denominations6 .....

Other Protestant denominations7 ..................

9,928

13,285

11,270

14,519

99.4 (0.2)

98.6 (0.3)

99.4 (0.3)

99.5 (0.2)

87.3 (1.3)

84.3 (1.2)

90.5 (0.9)

89.8 (0.8)

81.7 (1.4)

76.4 (1.4)

85.6 (1.0)

85.7 (0.9)

36.4 (1.7)

33.2 (1.5)

37.6 (1.7)

32.8 (1.7)

8.9 (1.2)

8.2 (0.8)

6.1 (0.7)

6.2 (0.8)

95.1 (0.6)

88.5 (1.1)

94.6 (0.7)

96.6 (0.5)

17.9 (1.4)

22.2 (1.3)

17.9 (1.1)

18.7 (1.3)

1

Includes birth control pills, Norplant and Implanon implants, 1-month (Lunelle) and 3-month (Depo-Provera) injectables, contraceptive patches, contraceptive rings, and intrauterine devices (IUD).

2

Includes Norplant and Implanon implants, 1-month (Lunelle) and 3-month (Depo-Provera) injectables, contraceptive patches, and contraceptive rings.

3

Includes hormonal and nonhormonal IUDs.

4

Includes rhythm or safe period by calendar, NFP (natural family planning), or safe period by basal body temperature or by cervical mucus test.

5

Includes women of other religious affiliations, not shown separately.

6

Includes Baptist, Southern Baptist, and other Fundamentalist Protestant denominations.

7

Includes Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, and other mainline Protestant denominations.
Page 14 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013

Table 5. Number of women aged 15–44 who have ever used the selected contraceptive method, percentage and number who used and

discontinued the method, and reasons for discontinuation: United States, 2006–2010

Contraceptive method

Pill Condom Depo-Provera

Contraceptive

patch

Number in thousands

Women who used selected method ............................... 45,021 49,932 12,529 5,631

Percentage (standard error)

Percentage who used and discontinued the method due to dissatisfaction ....... 30.4 (0.8) 9.3 (0.5) 45.8 (1.4) 48.5 (2.0)

Number in thousands

Women who discontinued using the method due to dissatisfaction ............ 13,696 4,660 5,733 2,732

Reason for discontinuation1 Percentage (standard error)

Too expensive ............................................ 3.4 (0.5) 2.7 (0.8) 0.9 (0.5) 2.9 (1.1)

Insurance did not cover it ..................................... 2.6 (0.5) * 0.5 (0.2) 1.4 (0.7)

Too difficult to use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.0 (1.0) 9.9 (1.6) 0.4 (0.2) 11.1 (2.1)

Too messy .............................................. 0.4 (0.2) 10.1 (1.5) 0.3 (0.1) 5.3 (1.1)

Your partner did not like it ..................................... 1.2 (0.4) 41.1 (3.0) 0.4 (0.2) *

You had side effects ........................................ 62.9 (1.3) 13.3 (1.6) 74.0 (2.0) 44.7 (3.0)

You were worried you might have side effects ........................ 11.8 (0.9) * 5.9 (0.9) 8.5 (1.7)

You worried the method would not work ............................ 2.6 (0.5) 16.9 (2.1) 0.9 (0.3) 9.3 (1.9)

The method failed, you became pregnant ........................... 11.3 (1.0) 5.2 (1.2) 4.3 (0.9) 9.3 (1.9)

The method did not protect against disease.......................... 1.8 (0.4) * 0.7 (0.3) *

Doctor told you not to use the method again ......................... 5.7 (0.8) 1.3 (0.5) 4.6 (0.9) 5.9 (1.3)

Decreased your sexual pleasure................................. 5.1 (0.6) 43.0 (2.6) 4.8 (1.0) 1.5 (0.7)

Too difficult to obtain ........................................ 2.4 (0.4) * * 0.4 (0.2)

Did not like changes to menstrual cycle ............................ 11.5 (1.1) * 30.5 (2.1) 8.7 (1.6)

Other ................................................. 10.9 (0.8) 11.2 (1.4) 6.9 (1.2) 13.9 (1.9)

* Figure does not meet standards of reliability or precision. 1

Women could give more than one reason for discontinuing selected method.
National Health Statistics Reports

n Number 62n February 14, 2013 Page 15

Technical Notes

Definition of terms

Education—Refers toa woman’s

education, as measured by the highest

degree she has completed at the date of

interview. Results are presented only for

respondents aged 22 and over, as many

younger women have not completed

their education. The recode variable was

HIEDUC.

Ever-use of contraceptive

methods—These data are based ona

series of individual questions asking

whether the woman had ever used 11

specific methods—birth control pills,

Depo-Provera, Lunelle, rhythm or safe

period by calendar, natural family

planning or safe period by temperature

or cervical mucus test, contraceptive

patches, vaginal contraceptive rings,

emergency contraception, condoms,

withdrawal, or vasectomy. Women were

also askeda question listing nine other

methods asking them to identify which

of these they had ever used. Women

were asked separately about their own

sterilizing operations. For the measure

of ever-use of the pill and condom, the

recode variables PILLR and

CONDOMR were used.

Ever had sexual intercourse since

menarche—Whether the woman ever

had heterosexual vaginal intercourse

since her first menstrual period. The

recode variable used was HADSEX.

Hispanic origin and race—

Classified according to Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)

guidelines for the presentation of race

and origin data in federal statistics (26).

The 1997 OMB guidelines that allow

respondents to report more than one

race or ethnic origin are followed, and

the recode variable HISPRACE2 was

used. In this report, the categories

Hispanic, and single-race non-Hispanic

white, non-Hispanic black, and nonHispanic Asian are shown. For

convenience in writing, the term

‘‘black’’ or ‘‘non-Hispanic black’’ is

used instead of the full phrase ‘‘nonHispanic black or African American,

single race.’’ Similarly, the term

‘‘white’’ or ‘‘non-Hispanic white’’ is

used instead of the full phrase ‘‘nonHispanic white, single race.’’

Nativity among Hispanic women—

Whether the woman was born outside of

the United States, based on BRNOUT

(raw variable). All women were asked

this question, however nativity is only

presented for Hispanic women.

Religious affiliation—Religious

affiliation is derived from RELCURR

(intermediate variable). It combines

Fundamentalist Protestant with Baptist

or Southern Baptist denominations into

one group, and all other Protestant

denominations into another. The residual

category, all other religious affiliations,

is not analyzed because of the diversity

of religions of which it is comprised,

e.g., Jewish, Muslim, and Mormon.

Members of these religious groups have

different patterns of contraceptive

method use that are masked when

combined.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 
 


 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Center for Health Statistics

3311 Toledo Road

Hyattsville, MD 20782

MEDIA MAIL
 

POSTAGE & FEES PAID
 

CDC/NCHS
 

PERMIT NO. G-284
 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

National Health Statistics Reports n Number 62 n February 14, 2013

Acknowledgments

The 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) was conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National

Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), with the support and assistance of a number of other organizations and individuals. Interviewing and other

tasks were carried out by the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research, under a contract with NCHS. The 2006–2010 NSFG was

jointly planned and funded by the following programs and agencies of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services:

• Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development • Office of Population Affairs • National Center for Health Statistics, CDC

• Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, CDC

• Division of Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention, CDC

• Division of Reproductive Health, CDC

• Division of Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, CDC • Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, CDC

• Children’s Bureau of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) • Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, ACF

• Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation

NCHS gratefully acknowledges the contributions of these programs and agencies, and all others who assisted in designing and carrying out the

2006–2010 NSFG.

This report was prepared under the general direction of Charles J. Rothwell, Director of NCHS’ Division of Vital Statistics (DVS), and Stephanie

J. Ventura, Chief of the Reproductive Statistics Branch of DVS. The authors are grateful for the valuable comments provided by Stephanie

Ventura; Robert Anderson, DVS Acting Co-Associate Director for Science; and Jennifer Madans, NCHS Associate Director for Science. The

authors also thank Yashodhara Patel and Isaedmarie Febo-Vázquez for their helpful contributions to the preparation of this report. The report

was produced by CDC/OSELS/NCHS/OD/Office of Information Services, Information Design and Publishing Staff: Danielle Woods edited the

report; typesetting was done by Annette F. Holman; and graphics were produced by Odell Eldridge (contractor).

Suggested citation

Daniels K, Mosher WD, Jones J.

Contraceptive methods women have ever

used: United States, 1982–2010. National

health statistics reports; no 62. Hyattsville,

MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

2013.

Copyright information

All material appearing in this report is in the

public domain and may be reproduced or

copied without permission; citation as to

source, however, is appreciated.

National Center for Health Statistics

Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D., Director
 

Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D., Associate Director
 

for Science
 

Division of Vital Statistics

Charles J. Rothwell, M.S., Director

For free e-mail updates on NCHS publication releases, subscribe online at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/govdelivery.htm.
 

For questions or general information about NCHS: Tel: 1–800–232–4636 • E-mail: cdcinfo@cdc.gov • Internet: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs
 

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2013–1250 • CS237118